"Some recent tips suggested that Nikon was waiting for the latest VR technology that offers up to five stops of image stabilization and will implement it in the long-awaited 80-400mm lens (which may have a slightly different focal length). I don't have information on other lenses at that point.

If the price is right I will upgrade to this from a Sigma 120-400 OS and get a D600. I had really hoped they would have released the 80-400 replacement sooner but then since we may be getting the 5 stop VR I kinda forgive them. My sigma gives me 2 solid stops despite promising 4. If this lens can give me 4 stops at least, perhaps panning on my monopod will become a lot easier

With 5 stops VR III this lens will shoot up over 2 grand I'm sure of it. It will be quite something when it is refreshed though. This was Nikon's first VR technology lens and the most in need of a replacement. Autofocus and improved VR 2014 or 2015 probably..

Yes, there could be one next year, but this is something we've been hearing about for many years. I certainly wouldn't hold my breath for it, but hopefully it won't take too much longer. The 80-400 and 300/4 could both use an update.

Finally some real hope for this lens. I got the impression from the article that he's expecting it in 2013. Hope it has a focus limiter, and if it comes in the form of 100-400 that would be even better.

Dodging said:
Get a Sigma 120-300 f2.8... Now there's a good replacement lol

Is there anything in this zoom range (i.e. max zoom circa 400) in anything NOT nikon thats worth getting? Tamron.... Sigma... anything else thats a good replacement for this mystical nikkor 80-400 update? Sigma is dodgy... seems to be lots of lemons from what I've read, and every Tamron I've had my hands on just... feels.... cheap.

looon said:
Finally some real hope for this lens. I got the impression from the article that he's expecting it in 2013. Hope it has a focus limiter, and if it comes in the form of 100-400 that would be even better.

I have seen articles like that for 5 years now. I think I have seen somewhere around 6 different patents from Nikon for a lens in this range (70-500) and none have ever came to fruition. I know I'm not holding my breath.

aquarian_light said:
Is there anything in this zoom range (i.e. max zoom circa 400) in anything NOT nikon thats worth getting? Tamron.... Sigma... anything else thats a good replacement for this mystical nikkor 80-400 update? Sigma is dodgy... seems to be lots of lemons from what I've read, and every Tamron I've had my hands on just... feels.... cheap.

Say maybe the Sigma 120-400... any word on that? orrrr the 150-500?

I agree on the longer Tamrons - I just don't like them and the images look soft tom me. The Sigma 120-400 OS is not bad, but the 150-500 is better... Even better is the 50-500.

My biggest gripe with the 80-400 is the slow focus speed, but I'm sure the replacement will be faster...

aquarian_light said:
Is there anything in this zoom range (i.e. max zoom circa 400) in anything NOT nikon thats worth getting? Tamron.... Sigma... anything else thats a good replacement for this mystical nikkor 80-400 update? Sigma is dodgy... seems to be lots of lemons from what I've read, and every Tamron I've had my hands on just... feels.... cheap.

Say maybe the Sigma 120-400... any word on that? orrrr the 150-500?

I have the Sigma 120-400OS. Sample variation is very wide though. Got mine 2nd hand. The 1st owner said that he went through 5 copies to get a good one. Nice lens if you do get a good one though. Very heavy( as heavy as a 70-200 VR). Some reviewers say that it is almost as sharp as the 100-400L. You can take a look at my Flikr for examples. I saw someone at F1 in Singapore this year with a D3s and a 120-300. Asked him why he didnt just get a 300/2.8 VR and he told me that he preferred the zoom since, 1) He wanted the zoom for those 'what if' shots 2) According to him the focus speed and sharpness on a good copy is very close to a 300/2.8 VR2( he went through 2 copies before settling on this one mind you). He also said that the 120-300 OS takes TC's relatively well 3) it weighs roughly the same as a 300.2.8 VR. If i were to take one lens to a safari it would be the 120-300 on a D400

My suspicion is the new lens would not go beyond 400mm. For, if it goes to 500mm, then the f/stop drops to 6.3 and no teleconverters can be used. A 500mm f/5.6 lens would be in the $3,000-4, 000 price range and I do not think Nikon needs this as it has the 200mm-400mm f/4.

And, the new third iteration of the VR is now out, so the probability of Nikon coming out with the new 80-400 replacement seems high. Maybe 100-400mm. Or even a 150mm-400mm. The idea of this lens, IMO is that it is portable like the current 80-400. And, holding the f/stop at 5.6 would allow the TC-14EII to be used so one can have 560mm at f/8.

msmoto said:
My suspicion is the new lens would not go beyond 400mm. For, if it goes to 500mm, then the f/stop drops to 6.3 and no teleconverters can be used. A 500mm f/5.6 lens would be in the $3,000-4, 000 price range and I do not think Nikon needs this as it has the 200mm-400mm f/4.

And, the new third iteration of the VR is now out, so the probability of Nikon coming out with the new 80-400 replacement seems high. Maybe 100-400mm. Or even a 150mm-400mm. The idea of this lens, IMO is that it is portable like the current 80-400. And, holding the f/stop at 5.6 would allow the TC-14EII to be used so one can have 560mm at f/8.

Hasn't Nikon patented 2 designs for the 100-500 4-5.6? I think that if it comes in around 2-2.5K US and it has very good performance at 500 people will pay for it. Although seeing the 70-200 f4 VR makes me think that even if this lens gets replaced it wont be cheap.

Nikon may have patented a 100mm - 500mm f/4-5.6 lens, but this has never been in production, thus no price. Years ago a 180mm-600mm f/8 zoom was sold, a slider type where the lens length was changed. Cost is unknown. A current 100-500mm f/4-5.6 would no doubt be in the $3,000-5,000 range. There is a very large difference in an f/4.5 and an f/4 lens.

Thus, I would suspect to keep the ability for a teleconverter, the 400mm end at f/5.6 is where it will be. Cost... my guess is about $2,200

msmoto said:
Nikon may have patented a 100mm - 500mm f/4-5.6 lens, but this has never been in production, thus no price. Years ago a 180mm-600mm f/8 zoom was sold, a slider type where the lens length was changed. Cost is unknown. A current 100-500mm f/4-5.6 would no doubt be in the $3,000-5,000 range. There is a very large difference in an f/4.5 and an f/4 lens.

Thus, I would suspect to keep the ability for a teleconverter, the 400mm end at f/5.6 is where it will be. Cost... my guess is about $2,200

Does Admin have a list or know how to compile one of all the patents for an "update" to it?

I would just like to see the list and I think everyone would be informed to see how long this has been going on. I remember seeing the sales/production numbers of all of Nikon's lenses and the 80-400mm actually was quite low - really low actually. One of those, "I would love to see it - but never end up buying one" lens.

I would think they would be focusing on a 24mm f2.8, 35mm f/2, 20mm f/2, replacements as well if not before. The primes outsold the 80-400vr by massive numbers. Could see a 70-300vr replacement as well - that is almost as old as the 80-400.

That's the chart - bit tricky since you have to add some of the runs together. It is interesting to see which lenses sell the most. You can also see and look at the past lens updates to see where the next couple will be. I couldn't find it off hand, but there is another chart that shows the per year. In the past, Nikon has upgraded lenses once they drop in sales drastically and after 5 years.

All of the expensive & Pro glass is lower - it's more expensive. About 188,000 over 12 years or almost 16,000 per year. In half that time the 70-300vr rack up over 886,000 or almost 148,000 per year - 9x more sold. That is what I was looking at. Hell the 14-24 has sold almost 180,000 in 5 years, and that costs more.

I know the 70-300VR has outsold many modest price teles. Both the initial 80-400VR Nikkor and the 2006 revamp get lots of evaluations as slow. From what I hear a faster 80-400VR would sell really well. Maybe msmoto's and TaoTeJared's researched numbers show why Nikon has been very slow to re-release this lens in a faster version. Too bad from my standpoint as for DX Nikon DSLRs like a possible D7200 this would look perfect. This thread is a very good one and the data presented does tell us a lot. Thanks to NR for this kind of valued information. Maybe this long awaited lens to buy for ME to buy shows I'd better not hold my breath much longer.